GIFT   OF 


Ebe  THniverstts  of  dbfcaao 


"WILY  BEGUILED" 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED  TO  THE   FACULTY 

OF  THE   GRADUATE   SCHOOL  OF  ARTS   AND   LITERATURE 

IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

DEPARTMENT   OF  ENGLISH 


BY 

BALDWIN  ^AXWELL 


Private  Edition,  Distributed  By 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  LIBRARIES 

CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 

1922 


Reprinted  from 
Studies  in  Philology,  Vol.  XIX,  No.  2,  April  1922 


Ube  TUntverstts  of  Cbicaao 


"WILY  BEGUILED" 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED   TO  THE   FACULTY 

OF  THE   GRADUATE   SCHOOL  OF  ARTS  AND   LITERATURE 

IN  CANDIDACY   FOR  THE   DEGREE   OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

DEPARTMENT  OF  ENGLISH 


BY 

BALDWIN  MAXWELL 


Private  Edition,  Distributed  By 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  LIBRARIES 

CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 

1922 


Reprinted  from 
Studies  in  Philology,  Vol.  XIX,  No.  2,  April  1922 


PREFACE 

This  reprint  from  Studies  in  Philology  represents  a  section  of  a 
dissertation  submitted  in  the  Graduate  School  of  the  University  of 
Chicago  in  partial  fulfilment  of  the  requirements  for  the  degree  of 
Doctor  of  Philosophy.  It  was  originally  planned  that  the  study  should 
include  the  text  of  Wily  Beguiled  with  an  introduction  and  notes. 
Because  of  the  increased  cost  of  printing,  however,  it  was  thought 
unnecessary  to  print  the  text,  there  being  already  two  excellent 
texts  of  the  play  easily  accessible,  and  the  printing  requirement  was 
reduced  to  what  were  considered  the  most  interesting  and  most 
important  sections  of  the  dissertation.  The  sections  which  are  not 
here  reprinted  were  entitled  (a)  "Personal  Satire,"  (b)  "Parallel 
Passages,"  and  (c)  "Robin  Goodfellow."  The  personal  satire  of 
Wily  consists  apparently  of  unconnected  thrusts,  like  the  thrusts  at 
Ben  Jonson  noted  on  pages  208  ff.  and  2i8n.;  certainly  there  is  no 
such  complete  and  extended  satire  as  Fleay  pictured  in  his  Shakespeare 
Manual  (pp.  272-79)  and  his  Biographical  Chronicle  (II,  158-62). 
Of  the  parallel  passages  noted  the  most  interesting  were  in  A  Knight 
of  the  Burning  Pestle,  where  the  similarities  are  so  close  as  to  con- 
vince me  that  Beaumont  made  use  of  Wily  in  the  construction  of  his 
play.  (These  parallels  are  printed  in  Modern  Language  Notes, 
XXXV,  503-4.)  In  the  section  devoted  to  Robin  Goodfellow  I 
attempted  to  study  his  development  and  to  trace  his  appearances 
through  Elizabethan  literature. 

It  is  with  real  pleasure  that  I  take  this  opportunity  to  thank 
those  who  have  guided  me  through  my  studies.  To  Professor  Edwin 
Greenlaw  I  owe  my  first  interest  in  Elizabethan  drama.  To  Pro- 
fessor John  M.  Manly,  to  Professor  Tom  Peete  Cross,  and  especially 
to  Professor  Charles  R.  Baskervill  I  am  indebted  for  suggestions  and 
corrections  more  than  I  can  enumerate.  With  the  remembrance 
of  association  with  men  such  as  these,  one  may  even  today  enter  the 
teaching  profession,  repeating  with  St.  Bernard, 

Deus  Bone!  quanta  pauperibus  procuras  solatia. 


[Reprinted  from  Studies  in  Philology,  Vol.  xix,  2,  April,  1922] 


WILY  BEGUILED1 
BY  BALDWIN  MAXWELL 

Although  Wily  Beguiled  has  long  been  acknowledged  one  of  the 
sprightliest  and  merriest  of  the  anonymous  Elizabethan  comedies, 
there  seems  never  to  have  been  a  serious  study  of  its  date  or  of  its 
authorship.  The  play  merits  more  attention  not  only  because  of 
its  excellence  but  also  because  of  (1)  its  possible  connection  with  the 
Wylie  Beguylie  performed  at  Merton  College,  Oxford,  in  1566/7, 
(2)  its  suggested  relation  to  the  group  of  Parnassus  plays  per- 
formed at  Cambridge  around  1600,  (3)  its  imitations  and  reflec- 
tions of  other  plays  of  the  period,  and  (4)  the  personal  satire  which 
Fleay  recognized  in  it. 

1  Under  12  November,  (1606),  there  appears  in  the  Register  of  the  Sta- 
tioners' Company  the  following  entry: 

Entered  for  his  Copie  vnder  thandes  of  master  Hartwell  and  Clement 
knighte  bothe  the  wardens  A  booke  called  Wylie  beguilde.  &c    .    vjd/ 

(Arber's  Transcript,  in,  333.) 

In  accordance  with  this  entry  an  edition — presumably  the  first  edition — 
appeared  in  this  year  with  the  title-page:  A/  PLEASANT/  COMEDIE,/ 
Called/  WILY  BEGVILDE./  The  Chiefe  Actors  be  these:/  A  poore 
Scholler,  a  rich  Foole,  and  a/  Knaue  at  a  shifte./  AT  LONDON./  Printed 
by  H.  L.  for  CLEMENT  KNIGHT:/  and  are  to  be  solde  at  his  Shop,  in 
Paules/  Church-yard,  at  the  signe  of  the  Holy  Lambe./  1606./  Two 
further  editions  were  printed  for  Clement  Knight,  one  by  W.  W.,  (William 
White),  at  an  unknown  date,  one  by  Thomas  Purfoot  in  1623.  A  fourth 
and  a  fifth  edition  were  printed  in  1630  and  1655;  and  a  sixth  edition 
was  printed  for  Thomas  Alchorn  in  1638.  Copies  of  the  1606  edition 
are  preserved  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  the  Dyce  Collection  and  the 
collection  of  the  Duke  of  Devonshire;  while  the  British  Museum  contains 
copies  of  all  the  other  editions.  "Of  that  printed  by  W.  White  only 
the  one  copy  is  now  known.  In  this  the  date,  which  apparently  was 
given,  has  been  torn  away.  White  is  not  known  as  a  printer  after 
about  1617,  and  internal  evidence  also  shows  his  edition  to  be  earlier 
than  Purfoot's,  that  is  than  1623.  Doubt  might  even  exist  as  to  the 
priority  of  the  edition  of  1606  were  it  not  that  the  device  upon  the 
undated  title-page  is  known  to  be  pretty  certainly  not  earlier  than  1611." 
(Greg,  Malone  Society  Reprint,  v-vi.)  The  play  has  been  reprinted  in 
Hawkins,  Origins,  HI,  in  Hazlitt,  Dodsley's  Old  English  Plays,  ix,  in  the 
Malone  Society  Reprints,  1912,  and  in  the  Tudor  Facsimile  Texts,  1912. 
206 


Baldwin  Maxwell  20? 


Modern  critics  have  generally  agreed  that  the  play  is  several 
years  older  than  the  earliest  known  edition,  that  of  1606.  Malone 
was  the  first,  I  think,  to  suggest  the  date  1596,  which  the  majority 
of  modern  writers  have  continued  to  accept.  He  thought  that 
Wily  Beguiled  must  have  been  written  in  that  year,  for  there  then 
appeared  the  following  passage  in  Nash's  Have  with  you  to  Saffron 
Walden: 

But  this  was  our  Gabriel  Hagiels  tricke  of  Wily  Beguily  herein,  that 
whereas  he  could  get  no  man  of  worth  to  cry  Placet  to  his  workes,  or 
meeter  it  in  his  commendation,  those  worthless  Whippets  and  Jack  Straws 
hee  could  get  he  would  seeme  to  enoble  and  compare  with  the  highest.1 

The  only  -way  in  which  this  passage  suggests  the  play  is  in  the 
mention  of  the  "tricke  of  Wily  Beguily."  But  as  Hales  pointed 
out,  the  expression  Wily  Beguily  was  known  before  1590.  Hales 
quoted  a  passage  from  Dr.  John  Harvey's  Discoursiue  Problem 
Concerning  Prophesies,  1588,  in  which  the  expression  is  found. 
But  it  must  have  been  common  before  that.  It  appears,  of  course, 
as  the  title  of  the  Oxford  play  'of  1566/7;  Florio  used  it  in  his 
translation  of  Montaigne's  essay  on  "The  Art  of  Conferring";3 
and  it  is  to  be  found  in  Latimer's  letters.4 

The  majority  of  critics  have  continued  to  accept  1596  as  the 
probable  date,  though  the  evidence  which  has  been  introduced  has 
been  only  of  such  nature  as  to  fix  1596  as  the  earliest  possible  date. 
Fleay  observes:  "That  the  original  date  of  this  play  is  1596/7  I 
have  no  doubt.  It  contains  passages  distinctly  parodying  Romeo 
and  Juliet  .  .  .  and  The  Merchant  of  Venice  .  .  .  ,  but  no  allu- 
sion to  any  later  play  of  Shakespeare/' 5  Ward  says :  "  Wily  Be- 
guiled, although  not  printed  till  1606,  was  clearly  written  at  a 
considerably  earlier  date.  It  must  have  been  composed  after  the 
production  of  both  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  a  famous  passage  in 
which  it  adopts  and  parodies,  and  Romeo  and  Juliet."  Ward  also 
accepts  the  suggestion  in  the  foot-notes  of  Hazlitt's  Dodsley  that 

2  Quoted  by  Hales,  "  Wily  Beguiled  and  The  Merchant  of  Venice,"  Essays 
and  Notes  on  Shakespeare,  pp.  212-213. 
'Book  III,  Chap.  vin. 

4  Letter  of  May  15,  1555.     Strype,  Eccl.  Mem.,  vr,  307. 
*Biog.  Chron.,  n,  159. 


208  Wily  Beguiled 

the  mention  of  Churms'  having  been  "  a  souldier  at  Gales  "  refers 
to  the  expedition  of  the  Earl  of  Essez  to  Cadiz  in  1596.6  Though 
we  admit  the  truth  of  these  observations,  we  can  say  only  that  Wily 
Beguiled  was  not  written  before  1596. 

Professor  J.  W.  Hales  and  Dr.  Brinsley  Nicholson  place  the  play 
"  in  or  after  1601,"  but,  so  far  as  I  know,  their  reasons  have  never 
been  printed.  After  discussing  the  parodies  of  Shakspere  and 
Malone's  dating  of  the  play,  Professor  Hales  closes  with:  "What 
is  the  real  date  there  is  no  space  now  to  discuss.  I  will  only  say 
that  Dr.  Brinsley  Nicholson  has  kindly  placed  at  my  free  dis- 
posal certain  notes  of  his  on  the  subject,  in  which  he  concludes, 
on  the  whole,  that  the  play  was  written  '  in  or  after  1601/ " 7 
That  the  correct  date  of  the  play  in  the  form  in  which  we  have 
it  is  late  1601  or  early  1602  I  shall  attempt  to  show  by  connecting 
certain  references  in  Wily  Beguiled  with  the  quarrel  then  at  its 
height  between  Ben  Jonson  and  his  fellow  dramatists. 

In  Satiromastix  Tucca  upbraids  Horace  for  having  brought  him 
upon  the  stage  as  a  juggler : 

He  teach  thee  to  turne  me  into  Bankes  his  horse,  and  to  tell  gentlemen 
I  am  a  juggler,  and  can  shew  tricks.8 

The  latest  editor  of  this  play  in  a  note  on  this  passage  apparently 
accepts  Fleay's  interpretation,  quoting  approvingly  from  Fleay  to 
the  effect  that  "In  the  Prologue  [to  Wily  Beguiled}  a  juggler 
enters  and  offers  to  show  tricks.  Now  in  the  second  scene  of 
Dekker's  Satiromastix,  Captain  Tucca  says  to  Horace,  i.  e.t  Jonson, 
'111  teach  thee  ...  to  tell  gentlemen  I  am  a  juggler,  and  can 
show  tricks.'  I  have  searched  in  vain  for  any  passage  either  in 
Jonson's  works,  or  in  any  play  in  which  he  could  possibly  have  had 
a  hand,  corresponding  to  this  description,  except  this  Prologue, 
which  must  therefore,  I  think,  be  assigned  to  Jonson.  .  .  " 9 

Neither  Fleay  nor  Penniman  seems  to  have  noticed  the  similar- 
ity between  another  passage  in  Wily  Beguiled  and  a  speech  of  Tucca 
almost  immediately  following  the  above  speech.  When  Blunt  tells 

9  History  of  English  Dramatic  Literature,  n,  612. 
7  Op.  cit.,  p.  214. 
•Act  I,  scene  2,  368-370. 

*  Fleay,  Biog.  Chron.,  rr,  159;  quoted  by  Penniman  in  his  edition  of 
Poetaster  and  Satiromastitc,  Belles  Lettres  Series,  408. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  209 

Tucca  that  he  must  shake  hands  with  Horace,  Tucca  interrupts 
him  with: 

Not  hands  with  great  Hunkes  there,  not  hands,  but  He  shake  the  gull- 
groper  out  of  his  tan'd  skinne.10 

As  Jonson  is  here  clearly  called  Hunkes  and  as  there  is  abundant 
evidence  of  his  slowness  and  painstaking  in  composition,  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  it  is  to  Jonson  that  Will  Cricket  in  Wily  Beguiled 
refers  when  he  says: 

Por  (do  you  marke)  I  am  none  of  these  sneaking  fellowes  that  wil 
stand  thrumming  of  Caps,  and  studying  vppon  a  matter,  as  long  as  Hunkes 
with  the  great  head  has  beene  about  to  show  his  little  wit  in  the  second 
part  of  his  paultrie  poetrie.11 

The  "  second  part  of  his  paultrie  poetrie "  is,  I  think,  Poetaster, 
Cynthia's  Revels  being  understood  as  the  first.  The  "  second  part " 
as  here  used  does  not,  of  course,  mean  the  second  piece  of  compo- 
sition; nor  does  it  mean  the  second  of  his  pieces  connected  with 
the  stage  quarrel.  Second  is  here  used  in  the  sense  of  a  continua- 
tion or  of  something  promised.  That  Poetaster  was  considered  a 
continuation  of  the  attacks  of  Cynthia's  Revels,  that  it  was  long 
promised  and  awaited,  is  evident  from  the  speech  of  Envy,  prefac- 
ing its  Prologue : 

What's  here?    THE  ARRAIGNMENT!  ay;  this,  this  is  it, 
That  our  sunk  eyes  have  waked  for  all  this  while: 

these  fifteen  weeks, 

So  long  as  since  the  plot  was  but  an  embrion, 
Have  I,  with  burning  lights  mixt  vigilant  thoughts, 
In  expectation  of  this  hated  play.u 

If  Jonson  had  a  hand  in  the  Induction  to  Wily  Beguiled  as 
Fleay  supposed,  either  this  Induction  was  written  for  an  entirely 
different  play  and  later  used  by  one  of  his  enemies,  or  Jonson 
wrote  an  induction  to  a  play  in  which  he  himself  was  satirized. 

10  Act  I,  scene  2,  11.  387-389. 

^Malone  Society  Reprint,  11.  1613-1617.  (The  line  references  through- 
out are  to  this  edition.)  The  suggestion  is  made  in  a  footnote  in  Haz- 
litt's  Dodsley  that  this  passage  alludes  to  some  real  circumstance  and 
person  (ix,  292).  No  identification,  however,  is  hazarded. 

» Lines  3-4;   14-17. 


210  Wily  Beguiled 

It  is  much  more  plausible  that  Jonson  had  no  hand  whatever  in 
Wily  Beguiled. 

Nor  is  it  necessary,  I  think,  to  seek  elsewhere  than  in  Jonson's 
known  works  for  an  explanation  of  Tucca's  resentment.  It  may, 
of  course,  be  argued  that  as  the  passage  in  Satiromastix  unites  the 
references  to  Banks'  horse  and  the  juggler,  the  resentment  was 
due  to  a  passage  in  one  of  Jonson's  plays  in  which  both  the  juggler 
and  the  horse  appear.  As  I  have  said,  however,  it  is  clear  that 
Poetaster  was  considered  a  continuation  of  Cynthia's  Revels,  and 
the  authors  of  Satiromastix,  in  replying  to  the  two  plays,  would 
regard  them  as  a  unit.  In  none  of  his  extant  plays  does  Jonson 
turn  anyone  into  "  Bankes.  his  horse  " ;  but  if  the  passage  be  taken 
figuratively,  Penniman  may  be  right  in  thinking  that  "  the  refer- 
ence here  is  probably  to  Poetaster,  m,  4,  a  scene  in  which  Tucca 
causes  the  Pyrgi  to  perform  as  Banks  caused  his  horse  to  show 
tricks." 1S  If  Penniman  be  correct  in  his  identification  of  the  first 
part  of  the  accusation,  it  is  quite  probable  that  the  second  part — 
that  Tucca  had  been  turned  into  a  juggler  and  made  to  show  tricks 
— is  to  be  found  in  Cynthia's  Revels.  In  the  Induction  to  this 
play,  Jonson,  in  satirizing  those  that  give  advice  in  the  theatre, 
makes  the  Second  Child  say: 

A  third  great-bellied  juggler  talks  of  twenty  years  since,  and  when  Mon- 
sieur wias  here,  and  would  enforce  all  wits  to  be  of  that  fashion,  because 
his  doublet  is  still  so.u 

True,  the  juggler  is  not  here  literally  brought  upon  the  stage  and 
made  to  do  tricks,  but  it  is  evident  from  the  other  speeches  of  the 
Induction  that  the  Children  did  mimic  the  censurers  as  they  spoke 
their  lines,  and  from  such  mimicking  it  would  have  been  easy  for 
the  spectators  to  have  recognized  in  the  person  aped  by  the  Second 
Child  such  a  well-known  character  as  Captain  Hannam  must  have 
been. 

However,  the  identification  in  Jonson's  plays  of  the  passages 
referred  to  by  Tucca  lies  outside  the  present  iproblem.  Eegardless 
of  whether  we  accept  the  references  I  have  suggested  or  of  whether 
we  prefer  to  believe  that  the  references  were  to  passages  in  a  lost 
play  by  Jonson,  we  can,  if  I  am  correct  in  believing  that  the 

"Op.  cit.,  p.  408. 

"Works,  ed.  Gifford,  1858,  p.  168. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  211 

Hunkes  passage  in  Wily  refers  to  Cynthiafs  Revels  and  Poetaster, 
assign  the  composition  of  Wily  Beguiled  in  its  present  form  to  a 
fairly  definite  date.  It  must  have  been  written  at  least  several 
months  after  Cynthia's  Revels: 

*' .  .  .  as  long  as  Eunices  with  the  great  head  has  beene  about  to  show 
his  little  wit  in  the  second  part  of  his  paultrie  poetrie." 

The  phrase  has  beene  about  to  show  is  perhaps  ambiguous.  Pos- 
sibly it  means  that  Poetaster,  though  long  promised,  had  not  yet 
appeared.  I  think,  however,  the  more  likely  interpretation  is  that 
Poetaster  had  appeared  very  shortly  before.  Either  interpretation 
would  result  in  practically  the  same  date.  Cynthia's  Revels  was 
performed  in  the  fall  of  1600,  Poetaster  in  1601.  Under  the  first 
interpretation  Wily  Beguiled  should  be  assigned  to  1601;  under 
the  second  to  late  1601  or  possibly  to  the  first  months  of  1602. 
That  the  second  interpretation  is  the  more  likely  is  indicated  by 
the  use  which  the  author  of  Wily  made  of  other  plays.  In  pas- 
sages which  I  have  already  quoted,  Fleay  and  Ward  call  attention 
to  borrowings  in  Wily  from  The  Merchant  of  Venice  and  Romeo 
and  Juliet  and  argue  from  them  that  Wily  must  have  been  written 
shortly  after  the  production  of  these  two  plays.  Both  of  these 
plays,  however,  were  iprobably  still  being  acted  in  1600,  and  there 
can  be  no  argument  that  an  author  would  be  more  apt  to  borrow 
from  a  play  soon  after  its  initial  production  than  after  it  had 
shown  its  worth  by  several  years  of  continued  popularity.  Pro- 
fessor Moore  Smith,  moreover,  contributed  to  The  Shakspere 
Allusion  Book  the  following  parallel  between  Wily  and  Hamlet: 

lie  make  him  fly  swifter  than  meditation. 

(Wily,  Prologue,  1.  37.) 
with  wings  as  swift 
As  meditation,  or  the  thoughts  of  love. 

(Hamlet,  i,  v,  30.) 

The  editor  notes  that  "there  is  difficulty  in  the  date"  and  that 
"  The  Wily  Beguilde  passage  may  be  coincidence  "  or  "  a  borrow- 
ing from  Hamlet  in  its  earlier  form."  1B  However,  as  the  author 
of  Wily  clearly  borrows  from  other  plays  of  Shakspere  and  as 
Hamlet  was  produced  during  late  1601  or  the  opening  weeks  of 

"Munro,  The  Shalcspere  Allusion  Book,  i,  30. 


212  Wily  Beguiled 

1602 — just  the  time  at  which  the  reference  to  Jonson  would  place 
Wily  Beguiled — it  seems  more  reasonable  to  admit  the  parody. 

Likewise,  The  Spanish  Tragedy,  from  which  Wily  borrows  most 
frequently/6  was  at  this  same  time  revived  upon  the  London 
stage,  as  is  witnessed  by  the  entry  in  Henslowe's  Diary  under 
September  25,  1601,  recording  the  payment  of  forty  shillings 
to  Jonson  "  vpon  his  writtinge  of  his  adicians  in  geronymo."  17 

In  dating  the  play,  I  have  been  careful  to  speak  of  it  as  "  Wily 
Beguiled  in  the  form  in  which  we  now  have  it."  It  is,  of  course, 
possible  that  there  was  a  version  prepared  in  1596-7,  and  that  the 
reference  to  Jonson  and  perhaps  a  borrowing  from  Hamlet  were 
inserted  in  1601-2.  I  see  no  reason,  however,  for  supposing  that 
there  was  a  1596-7  version.  Though  the  iplay  obviously  shows 
signs  of  revision,  the  original  version  should,  I  believe,  be  placed 
far  back  of  1596. 

II 

The  first  attempt  to  assign  Wily  Beguiled  to  a  definite  author 
was  made  by  Herr  Bernardi  in  the  Hamburger  Litteraturllatt  in 
1856.  Bernardi  assigned  it  to  Shakspere.  I  have  been  unable  to 
examine  his  article,  but  it  obviously  merits  the  contempt  with 
which  critics  have  ignored  it.  Both  Dyce  and  Fleay  ascribed  the 
play  to  Peele,  and  most  modern  critics  have  inclined  to  their  view. 
The  basis  for  the  ascription  is  the  passage  in  the  Induction  where 
a  juggler,  coming  in,  addresses  the  Prologue  as  "humorous 
George."  Ward  says  that  if  Peele  was  the  "' humorous  George' 
of  the  Prologue  to  the  later  version  of  this  play,  he  may  very 

19  Professor  Sarrazin  in  his  Thomas  Kyd  und  sein  Kreis,  Berlin,  1892, 
pp.  75  ff.,  pointed  out  a  large  number  of  these  borrowings,  but  one  can 
easily  increase  his  list.  It  seems  that  in  the  majority  of  cases  the  author 
of  Wily  used  the  language  of  Kyd  to  heighten  his  own  style,  though  at 
times — notably  in  the  speeches  of  Robin  in  scene  xvi — passages  from  The 
Spanish  Tragedy  are  burlesqued. 

17  Greg,  I,  149.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  among  the  many 
borrowings  from  The  Spanish  Tragedy  none  of  the  additions  by  Jonson 
is  referred  to.  From  such  omissions  it  may  be  argued  that,  as  Jonson  is 
elsewhere  satirized  in  the  play,  the  composition  of  Wily  must  antedate 
his  revision  of  The  Spanish  Tragedy;  but  the  more  probable  supposition, 
I  think,  is  that  Wily  was  in  no  sense  a  purposed  attack  upon  Jonson, 
though  the  author  introduced  an  occasional  thrust  or  two  in  his  direction. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  213 

probably  have  been  author  at  least  in  part  of  it  in  its  original 
form."  18  Schelling  and  Baker  agree  that  there  is  "  nothing  .  .  . 
to  raise  a  question  of  Peele's  authorship  except  the  simple  obvious- 
ness with  which  the  plot  is  develotped  "  19 — "  a  trait  in  which  Peele 
cannot  be  considered  conspicuous."20  Miss  Martha  Gause  Mc- 
Caulley  and  Mr.  Penniman,  however,  go  so  far  as  to  call  the  play 
"  Peele's  Wily  Beguiled"  21 

But  if  I  am  correct  in  the  dating  of  the  play,  Wily  could  not 
in  its  present  form  have  been  written  before  1601,  some  two  years 
after  Peele's  death.  However,  since  Professor  Ward  has  sug- 
gested two  versions,  and  as  I  shall  later  argue  that  our  version 
represents  a  revision,  I  should  perhaps  give  my  reasons  for  doubt- 
ing Peele's  authorship  of  even  an  earlier  version.  In  the  first 
place,  the  value  of  the  "  humorous  George  "  passage  as  a  basis  for 
ascription  has,  I  think,  been  greatly  overestimated.  The  term 
humorous  as  here  used  does  not  seem  to  fit  the  jesting  Peele,  for 
here  it  clearly  means  melancholy,  "  in  the  dumps."  Further,  we 
have  no  evidence  of  Peele's  ever  acting  as  Prologue  to  his  plays, 
and  unless  he  did,  there  could  be  no  significance  to  the  juggler's 
addressing  the  Prologue  as  "humorous  George."  It  is,  I  think, 
much  more  (plausible  that  the  George  referred  to  was  not  the  author 
but  one  of  the  popular  actors  of  the  day,  perhaps  George  Brian. 
Or  possibly  the  George  may  be  no  more  definite  than  the  frequent 
Jack,  which  also  appears  in  the  Induction. 

Though  the  language  of  Edward  I,  and  especially  some  of  the 
figures,  remind  one  of  Wily  Beguiled,  to  the  other  plays  of  Peele 
Wily  bears  little  resemblance,  except  that  all  of  Peele's  work,  like 
Wily,  abounds  in  highly  figurative  language.  But  mostj  if  not 
all,  of  the  similar  figures  in  Wily  and  Edward  I  were  conventional 
figures  of  the  age  and  may  be  paralleled  in  the  plays  of  numerous 
other  dramatists.  In  the  nature  of  the  comedy  and  in  dramatic 
technique,  moreover,  there  are  several  striking  differences  between 

*Hist.  of  Eng.  Dram.  Lit.,  I,  375. 

"Baker,  Cambridge  History  of  English  Literature,  v,  145. 

30  Schelling,  Elizabethan  Drama,  I,  320. 

31  McCaulley,  "  Function  and  Content  of  the  Prologue,  Chorus,  and  Other 
Non-Organic   Elements   in  the  English   Drama,   from  the   Beginnings  to 
1642."    University  of  Pennsylvania  Studies  in  English  Drama,  First  series, 
1917,  p.  198.     Penniman,  Poetaster  and  Satiromastix    (Belles-Lettres  Se- 
ries), p.  408. 


214  Wily  Beguiled 

Wily  and  the  plays  of  Peele.  The  comic  scenes  in  Wily,  totally 
unlike  Peele's  in  their  broad  humor,  are  far  too  good  to  have  come 
from  the  pen  of  George  Peele.  In  none  of  his  iplays  can  be  found 
such  sprightly  popular  types  as  Will  Cricket,  Pegge  Pudding,  and 
Mother  Midnight. 

A  still  more  striking  contrast  is  presented  in  the  differences  in 
technique.  Nowhere  in  Peele,  for  example,  is  any  use  made  of 
dramatic  irony.  In  Wily  Beguiled,  however,  the  author  used 
dramatic  irony  at  every  opportunity.  Churms,  in  planning  with 
Leila  their  elopement,  declares: 

If  on  th'aduenture  all  the  dangers  lay, 
That  Europe  or  the  westerne  world  affords, 
IWtere  it  to  combate  Cerberus  himselfe, 
Or  scale  the  brasen  walles  of  Plutoes  court; 
When  as  there  is  so  faire  a  prize  propos'd, 
If  I  shrinke  backe  or  leaue  it  vnperform'd, 
Let  the  World  canonize  me  for  a  Coward: 

Should  Sophos  meete  vs  there  accompanied  with  some 

Champion, 

Wfith  whome  twere  any  credit  to  encounter, 

Were  he  as  stout  as  Hercules  himselfe, 

Then  would  I  buckle  with  them  hand  to  hand: 

And  bandy  blowes  as  thicke  as  hailestones  fall, 

And  carrie  Lelia  away  in  spite  of  all  their  force.*1 

Though  the  audience  knows  that  a  beating  is  in  store  for  him  at 
the  hands  of  Fortunatus,  who  with  Sophos  is  awaiting  them  by 
the  forest  side,  Churms  little  suspects  that  he  is  to  have  any 
adventure  or  that  the  journey  will  prove  other  than  the  most  quiet. 
So  also,  just  before  word  is  brought  to  him  that  Churms  has 
eloped  with  Lelia,  Gripe  tells  us  of  his  happiness  and  of  his  con- 
fidence in  Churms: 

Euery  one  tels  me  I  looke  better  then  I  was  wont, 

My  hearts  lightened,  my  spirits  are  reuiued, 

Why  me  thinkes  I  am  eene  young  againe; 

It  ioyes  my  heart  that  this  same  peeuish  girle  my  daughter 

will  be  rul'd  at  the  last  yet: 

But  I  shall  neuer  be  able  to  make  M.  CKurmes  amends  for 

the  great  paines  he  has  taken.*3 

"Lines  1817-1823,  1836-1842. 
•"Lines   2244-2251. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  215 

Nowhere,  I  have  said,  does  Peele  use  dramatic  irony.  The  nearest 
approach  to  it  is  to  be  found  in  The  Arraignment  of  Paris,  where 
Paris  swears  that  he  will  always  remain  true  to  Oenone.  At  the 
time  of  his  oaths  the  situation  that  was  to  make  him  desert  her 
had,  of  course,  not  developed,  as  he  had  not  yet  met  the  goddesses. 
If  this  be  a  case  of  dramatic  irony  at  all,  it  is  entirely  different 
from  the  dramatic  irony  of  Wily,  where,  for  instance,  we  have 
learned  from  the  action  long  before  Gripes'  speech  that  the 
"great  paines"  Churms  has  taken  are  toward  an  end  just  oppo- 
site to  what  Gripe  supposes. 

Another  noteworthy  difference  in  technique  is  to  be  seen  in  the 
opening.  In  the  first  scene  of  Wily  Beguiled  Gripe  enters  solus, 
and  in  a  speech  more  than  a  ipage  in  length  explains  the  situation 
at  the  opening,  tells  of  his  own  wealth,  of  his  son  who  "followes 
the  wars,"  of  the  bringing  up  which  he  has  bestowed  upon  his 
daughter,  and  of  his  plan  to  marry  her  to  the  heir  of  rich  Ploddall. 
In  none  of  the  five  plays  usually  ascribed  to  Peele  is  there  any 
such  expository  opening.  None  even  begins  with  a  soliloquy,  there 
being  in  every  case  three  or  more  characters  discovered  in  the 
opening  scene. 

There  is,  too,  a  striking  difference  in  the  development  of  the 
action.  It  may  almost  be  said  that  it  is  the  unvarying  rule  for  a 
character  in  Wily  Beguiled  to  inform  the  audience  of  his  plan  to 
perform  an  act  before  he  performs  it.  Compare,  for  instance,  the 
lines  following  lines  30,  74,  438,  1037,  et  passim.  Nothing  of 
this  sort  is  to  be  found  in  the  plays  of  Peele. 

There  is  also  considerable  internal  evidence  of  another  kind 
that  argues  against  Peele's  authorship  of  Wily  Beguiled.  Little, 
however,  can  be  got  from  a  comparison  of  the  meter  and  alliter- 
ation. The  number  of  rhymed  lines  shows  nothing;  for  though 
the  percentage  of  rhymed  lines  in  Wily  Beguiled  is  more  than 
twice  as  great  as  the  added  percentage  of  rhymed  lines  in  the 
Arraignment  of  Paris,  David  and  Bethsale,  and  Battle  of  Alcazar, 
yet  there  are  more  rhymed  lines  in  Edward  I,  corrupt  though 
the  text  be,  than  in  Wily  Beguiled.  Neither  does  an  examina- 
tion of  feminine  endings  or  run-on-lines  argue  against  Peele's 
authorship.  Though  Wily  Beguiled  shows  a  larger  percentage  of 
feminine  endings  and  a  smaller  percentage  of  run-on-lines  than 
the  Arraignment  of  Paris,  David  and  Bethsabe,  and  Battle  of 


216  Wily  Beguiled 

Alcazar,  yet  the  differences  between  these  plays  and  The  Old  Wives 
Tale  are  much  greater  than  between  them  and  Wily  Beguiled. 

The  frequency  of  the  alliteration  in  Wily  Beguiled  might  at  first 
glance  suggest  Peele's  authorship.  In  the  Arraignment  of  Paris 
there  are  207  cases  of  alliteration;  in  David  and  Bethsabe  100; 
in  Edward  I  110;  in  Wily  Beguiled  175.  But  in  Wily  Beguiled 
the  alliteration  seems  to  be  of  a  slightly  simpler  kind.  In  Peele, 
on  the  average,  about  50%  of  the  cases  consist  of  two  words  begin- 
ning with  the  same  letter;  under  this  head  fall  74.29%  of  the 
cases  in  Wily  Beguiled.  The  percentage  of  cases  in  which  three 
words  begin  with  the  same  letter  is  in  Peele  about  37.89,  in  Wily 
but  15.42. 

Of  more  value,  however,  is  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  use 
of  Latin  phrases.  The  number  of  these  phrases  shows  nothing. 
In  Edward  I  Peele  uses  20;  in  The  Old  Wives  Tale  8;  in  The 
Battle  of  Alcazar  0 ;  in  David  and  Bethsabe  0 ;  and  in  The  Arraign- 
ment of  Paris  1,  omitting  of  course  in  the  last  play  the  Latin 
speeches  with  which  the  gifts  were  (presented  to  Elizabeth.  In 
Wily  there  are  12.  But  there  is  a  striking  difference  in  the  way 
these  phrases  are  used.  Of  the  29  cases  in  Peele,  5  are  exclama- 
tions : 

O  Cupido,  quantus,  quantus!      (Edward  I,  line  1313.) 

Facinus  scelus,  infandum  nefas!      (Ibid.,  line  2757.) 

O  caelum!  O  terra!  O  maria!  O  Neptune!      (0.  W.  T.,  line  16.) 

0  falsum  Latinum!      (Ibid.,  line  348.) 

Adeste,  daemones!     .(Ibid.,  line  505.) 

Of  the  twelve  Latin  phrases  in  Wily  none  is  an  exclamation. 
Peele,  too,  made  use  of  Latin  salutations: 

Pax  vobia,  Pax  vobis. 

Et  cum  spiritu  tuo.     (Edward  I,  line  402.) 

Dominus  vobiscum. 

Et  cum  spiritu  tuo.     (Ibid.,  lines  2707-8.) 

Bona  Nox.     (0.  W.  T.,  line  125.) 

There  is  no  Latin  salutation  in  Wily  Beguiled.  On  the  other 
hand,  of  the  29  Latin  phrases  in  Peele  only  one  appears  to  be  a 
popular  saying  or  proverb ; 24  whereas  of  the  12  bits  of  Latin  in 

*  Edward  I,  line  1526. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  217 

Wily — of  the  7  bits  consisting  of  more  than  two  words — 4  are 
obviously  popular  sayings: 

Idem  eat  non  apparere  et  non  esse.     (Line  1150.) 
Virtus  sine  Censu  languet.     (Line  800.) 
Qui  dissimulare  nescit,  nescit  vivere.     (Line  542.) 
Si  niMl  attuleris  &C.25     (Line  514.) 

Again,  a  good  proportion  of  Peele's  Latin  is  to  be  traced  to  the 
Church  service: 

Secula  seculorum     (Edward  I,  line  490.) 

Peccavi  miserere  David 

In  amo  amavi     (Ibid.,  lines  1504-05.) 

Per  misericordiam     (Ibid.,  line  2392.) 

Or  a  pro  nobis     (Ibid.,  lines  2540.) 

Dominus  vobiscum 

Et  cum  spiritu  tuo     (Ibid.,  lines  2707-08.) 

(Only  one  of  the  foregoing  phrases,  it  should  be  noted,  is  put  in 
the  mouth  of  the  priest.)  None  of  the  Latin  in  Wily  seems  to 
have  been  in  any  way  suggested  by  the  service.  Similarly,  at 
least  three  of  Peek's  Latin  phrases  are  direct  quotations  from 
Horace,26  from  whom  the  author  of  Wily  does  not  quote. 

I  have  pointed  out  that  between  Wily  Beguiled  and  the  plays 
of  Peele  there  are  differences  in  the  use  of  Latin  phrases,  in  alli- 
teration, and  in  the  nature  of  the  comic  material;  and  a  very 
striking  contrast  in  dramatic  technique.  In  view  of  the  absence 
of  any  external  evidence  for  assigning  Wily  to  Peele,  these  differ- 
ences are,  I  think,  sufficient  to  warrant  our  denying  him  the  author- 
ship of  even  an  earlier  form  of  the  play. 

The  fact  that  Jonson  is  satirized  in  Wily  Beguiled  immediately 
suggests  the  possibility  of  Wily's  having  been  written  or  reworked 
by  Marston.  Albano  in  What  You  Will  laments  the  same  situa- 
tion which  Wily  portrays: 

35  Si  nihil  attuleris,  ibis  Homere  foras.  This  **  olde  sayd  Saw  "  was  used 
by  Nash  in  his  preface  to  Greene's  JfenapKon  (Gregory  Smith,  Elizabethan 
Critical  Essays,  I,  318)  ;  and  it  appears  in  the  Return  from  Parnassus, 
Part  I,  lines  1526-27. 

18  Edward  I,  line  202  is  taken  from  Ars  Poet.,  139. 
Edward  I,  line  678  is  taken  from  Serm.,  I,  3,  6. 
Edward  I,  lines  1923-4  are  from  Epistles,  I,  2,  68-9. 
"m,  ii,  66-67. 


SIS  Wily  Beguiled 

'tis  now  the  age  of  gold, — 
For  it  all  marreth,  and  even  virtue's  sold.17 

There  are,  too,  a  number  of  verbal  similarities  between  Wily  and 
the  works  of  Marston,  but  on  close  examination  these  prove  to 
be  neither  so  striking  nor  so  numerous  as  similarities  between  Wily 
and  the  works  of  other  dramatists.  The  verse  of  Wily  is  most 
obviously  not  the  verse  of  Marston ;  it  is  far  more  lyric  and  full  of 
more  elaborate  conceits.  There  would  be  no  justification  for  our 
assuming  that  the  author  of  Wily  intended  burlesque  in  his  elabo- 
rate "Furor  Poeticus"  language,  or  that  he  regarded  his  verse 
as  in  other  than  the  best  strain;  but  his  verse  is  the  very  type 
that  Marston,  in  the  mouth  of  Slip,  satirizes  in  What  You  Will: 

.     Shall  I  speak  like  a  poet? — • 
thrice  hath  the  horned  moon — .* 

Moreover,  if  Marston  were  writing  or  revising  Wily  Beguiled 
in  1601  or  1602,  he  would,  desiring  to  attack  Jonson,  hardly  have 
contented  himself  with  two  or  three  thrusts,29  or  indeed  with 
less  than  the  most  outspoken  satire.  That  the  satire,  however, 
consists  merely  in  odd  thrusts,  the  author  not  having  deliberately 
set  out  to  satirize  Jonson,  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that,  though 
the  Spanish  Tragedy  is  burlesqued  in  a  great  number  of  cases, 
not  one  of  the  additions  by  Jonson  is  referred  to. 

•in,  i,  72-73. 

"I  have  called  attention  to  the  passage  in  which  Jonson  is  spoken  of  as 
Hunks.  It  is  possible  that  there  is  also  a  thrust  at  Jonson  in  the  reference 
by  the  Prologue  to  Spectrum: 

"  Spectrum  is  a  looking  glasse  indeede 
Wherein  a  man  a  History  may  read, 
Of  base  conceits  and  damned  roguerie: 
The  very  sinke  of  hell-bred  villeny." 

In  the  Prologue  to  Every  Man  in  his  Humour  Jonson  says  that  he  "  would 
shew  an  image  of  the  times,"  and  in  the  Induction  to  Every  Man  out  of  his 
Humour  Asper  declares: 

"Well,  I  will  scourge  those  apes, 
And  to  these  courteous  eyes  oppose  a  mirror, 
As  large  as  is  the  stage  whereon  we  act; 
Where  they  shall  see  the  time's  deformity 
Anatomized  in  every  nerve,  and  sinew, 
With  constant  courage,  and  contempt  of  fear." 


Baldwin  Maxwell  219 

III 

Mr.  Boas  dismisses  Wily  Beguiled  with  the  observation  that 
it  "  was  probably  a  Cambridge  play/' 30  and  Mr.  Greg  hazards 
the  suggestion  that  it  was  "  a  Cambridge  piece  of  the  circle  of 
Parnassus."  31  Beyond  the  fact  that  Wily  seems  to  be  a  school 
play,  I  can  find  but  two  reasons  for  connecting  it  with  Cambridge : 
first,  the  mention  of  Momus  in  the  Prologue  to  Wily  is,  as  Fleay 
pointed  out,32  in  the  same  spirit  as  the  Induction  to  the  Return 
from  Parnassus,  Part  II,  and  second,  Churms'  stating  that  he  had 
been  "  at  Cambridge  a  Scholler."  33  Eef  erences  to  Momus,  how- 
ever, occur  far  too  frequently  in  the  drama  of  the  time  to  allow 
our  giving  much  weight  to  his  mention  here.34  Similarly  the 
mention  of  Churms'  having  been  "at  Cambridge  a  Scholler " 
seems  to  deserve  little  consideration.  In  the  first  place  Cambridge 
may  have  been  used  for  alliteration.  Churms  says :  "  I  haue  beene 
at  Cambridge  a.  Scholler,  at  Cales  a  Souldier,  and  now  in  the 
Country  a  Lawyer>  and  the  next  degree  shal  be  a  Connicatcher." 
Again,  it  should  be  noted  that  Churms  is  the  villain  of  the  play. 
Had  it  been  Sophos  who  had  been  at  Cambridge,  there  might  be 
reason  for  the  claim ;  but  a  Cambridge  audience  could  hardly  have 
felt  complimented  in  seeing  a  son  of  Cambridge  do  all  in  his  power 
to  cozen  Sophos,  the  personification  of  learning.  Possibly  the 
reference  is  meant  for  a  good-natured  "  slam " — perhaps  by  a 

30  University  Drama  in  the  Tudor  Age,  p.  157  n.,  and  Cambridge  Hist. 
Eng.  Lit.,  vi,  338  n. 

31 M alone  Society  Reprint,  p.  vii. 

M  Biog.  Chron.,  n,  158. 

"Line  68. 

84  The  mention  of  Momus  might  equally  well  be  offered  as  an  argument 
for  Oxford  authorship.  iWftlliam  Gager  had,  at  the  close  of  a  series  of 
performances  at  Oxford  in  1592,  brought  upon  the  stage  this  god  of  ridi- 
cule, who  attacked  acting  and  plays  in  general.  Momus'  criticisms  were 
answered  and  he  himself  held  up  to  contumely  in  an  Epilogus  Responsiuus. 
(Boas,  University  Drama,  233.)  Out  of  this  jest  grew  the  Gager-Rainolds 
Controversy,  Kainolds  thinking  that  Gager  intended  to  satirize  him,  as 
he  had  formerly  expressed  some  of  the  views  which  were  satirized  in 
Momus.  This  controversy  seems  to  Tiave  been  still  before  the  public  in 
1599,  when  there  was  published  Th'  Overthrow  of  Stage-Playes  be  way  of 
controversie  betwixt  D.  Gager  and  D.  Rainolds,  wherein  all  the  reasons 
that  can  be  made  for  them  are  notably  refuted. 


220  Wily  Beguiled 

student  of  the  sister  university.  Moreover,  the  nature  of  the 
satire  in  Wily  and  development  of  the  plot  are  entirely  different 
from  those  of  the  plays  of  the  Parnassus  trilogy.  There  is  none 
but  the  most  ordinary  verbal  similarity,  and  there  is  the  striking 
difference  that  whereas  Philomusus,  Studioso,  and  the  others  are 
continually  voicing  their  discontent  with  their  poverty,  Sophos 
is  quite  satisfied  with  his  material  wealth: 

I  am  not  rich,  I  am  not  very  poore, 

I  neither  want  nor  euer  shall  exceede, 

The  meane  is  my  content,  I  Hue  twixt  two  extreames.15 

That  Wily  Beguiled  is  a  school  play  has  been  generally  admitted. 
The  fact  that  Beaumont  seems  to  have  used  it,  however,  in  con- 
structing his  satire  in  The  Knight  of  the  Burning  Pestle  3e  seems 
to  indicate  that  it  was  acted  upon  the  London  stage,  and  most  likely 
Ward  is  right  in  conjecturing  that  it  was  a  University  play  adapted 
for  a  London  audience.38*  That  the  "University  at  which  it  was 
originally  performed,  however,  was  not  Cambridge  but  Oxford, 
I  shall  attempt  to  show  by  connecting  Wily  Beguiled  with  the  lost 
Wylie  Beguylie  which  was  performed  at  Merton  College,  Oxford, 
during  the  Christmas  holidays  of  1566-7. 

IV 

By  all  odds  the  most  interesting  question  connected  with  Wily 
Beguiled  is  the  possibility  of  its  being  in  some  way  related  to 
the  lost  Wylie  Beguylie.  Mr.  Boas,  however,  in  writing  about 
the  University  drama,  has  twice  dodged  this  interesting  issue.  In 
the  Cambridge  History  he  laments  the  loss  of  Wylie  Beguylie, 
but  adds  that  as  Wily  Beguiled  was  influenced  so  directly  by  The 
Spanish  Tragedy,  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  and  Romeo  and  Juliet, 
it  is  doubtful  whether  it  can  be  connected  with  the  Merton  comedy 
of  1567.37  But  it  seems  that  Wily  Beguiled  as  we  have  it  is  a 
reworked  play,  and  if  it  is,  the  question  of  its  relation  to  Wylie 
Beguylie  is  at  once  reopened.  Though  he  apparently  did  not 
suspect  any  relationship  between  the  two  plays,  Professor  Ward, 

"Lines  790-792. 

MSee  my  note  in  Modern  Language  Notes,  xxvv,  503-4. 

"•Hist,  of  Eng.  Dram.  Lit.,  n,  612. 

17  vi,  338  n. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  221 

in  a  passage  which  I  have  already  quoted,  has  suggested  that  Wily 
represents  a  revision  of  an  earlier  play.  Professor  Baskervill  is 
the  only  writer  I  have  found  who  suggests  that  Wily  Beguiled  may 
have  been  a  reworking  of  Wylie  Beguylie,  all  other  critics  taking 
a  stand  similar  to  that  of  Mr.  Boas.  In  reviewing  the  University 
Drama  in  the  Tudor  Age,  Mr.  Baskervill  criticises  Mr.  Boas  for 
not  discussing  the  possible  relationship  of  the  two  plays,  and  (points 
out  that  the  humor  of  Wily  Beguiled  is  of  a  type  no  more  subtle 
than  that  of  Gammer  Gurton's  Needle.58  The  spirit  of  the  whole 
play — or  rather  of  all  the  comic  scenes — certainly  seems  to  belong 
to  a  period  far  earlier  than  1600.  The  do  you  mark?,  do*  you 
understand?,  do  you  see?,  with  which  Will  Cricket  punctuates 
his  longer  speeches  recall  the  See  now?  of  Hodge.  In  a  number 
of  comic  passages  also  Wily  is  reminiscent  of  the  two  earliest 
English  comedies.  Will,  for  instance,  has  the  same  queer  grounds 
for  hope  in  his  love-making  as  have  Ealph  Eoister  and  Hodge : 

Truly  I  was  neuer  with  hir,  but  I  know  I  shall  speed.     For  tother  day 
she  lookt  on  me  and  laught,  and  thats  a  good  signe  (ye  know).18 


**  Journal  of  English  and  Germanic  Philology,  xrv   (1915),  620. 
'•Lines   104-06.    (Compare  Ralph  Roister  Doister,  I,  ii,   163,   165-66: 
"  I  knowe  she  loveth  me,  but  she  dare  not  speake. 

She  looked  on  me  twentie  tymes  yesternight, 
And  laughed  so." 
And  Gammer  Gurton's  Needle,  n,  i,  62-4. 

"Kirstian  Clack,  Tom  Simpsons  maid,  by  the  masse,  corns  hether 

to  morow, 

iCham  not  able  to  say,  betweene  us  what  may  hap; 
She  smyled  on  me  last  Sunday,  when  ich  put  on  my  cap." 
Similarly  Will's  promise  to  Pegge  in  Wily  Beguiled: 

"  When  thou  art  ready  to  sleepe,  He  be  ready  to  snort : 

'When  thou  art  in  health,  He  be  in  gladnesse,"  etc.  (11.  680  ff.), 
recalls  the  famous  letter  of  Ralph  Roister ;  while  his  "  rolling,  rattling, 
rumbling  eloquence  " : 

"Sweet  Pegge,  honny  Pegge,  fine  Pegge,  daintie  Pegge,  brave 

Pegge,  kind  Pegge,  comely  Pegge,"     (636-37), 
suggests  the  passage  in  Ralph  Roister,  rv,  iii,  74-77: 

"  Gentle  mistresse  Custance  now,  good  mistresse  Custance, 
Honey  mistresse  Custance  now,  sweete  mistresse  Custance, 
Golden  mistresse  Custance  now,  white  mistresse  Custance, 
'Silken  mistresse  Custance  now,  faire  mistresse  Custance." 

8 


222  Wily  Beguiled 

Several  of  Will's  speeches  contain  such  doggerel  passages  as: 

But  for  a  sweet  face,  a  fine  beard,  comely  corps, 

And  a  Carowsing  Codpeece, 

All  England  if  it  can 

Show  mee  such  a  man, 

To  win  a  wench  by  gis, 

To  clip,  to  coll,  to  kisse 

As  William  Cricket  is.*0 

And  again: 

Sweet  hony,  bonny,  suger  candie,  Pegge, 

Whose  face  more  faire,  then  Brocke  my  fathers  Oow, 

Whose  eyes  do  shine  like  bacon  rine, 

Whose  lips  are  blue  of  azure  hue, 

Whose  crooked  nose  downe  to  her  chin  doth  bow.*1 

These  passages,  mixed  with  his  singing  of  short  snatches,  his  dan- 
cing, his  talking  to  the  audience,  as  in  lines  427  ff.,  669,  1584,  and 
elsewhere,  suggest  that  "Will  Cricket  is  much  nearer  the  old  vice 
than  were  the  clowns  of  1600.  Then  too,  the  chief  humor  of  the 
last  part  of  the  play  consists  in  Fortunatus'  beating  Eobin  Good- 
fellow  and  Churms  off  the  stage — an  old  comic  device,  though 
perhaps  an  eternal  one. 

There  are  also  several  evident  contradictions  and  incongruities 
in  the  play  which  make  it  seem  that  Wily  Beguiled  represents 
a  reworking  of  an  older  play.  The  first  passage  suggesting  re- 
vision is  in  scene  iv.  "Until  scene  xvi  all  of  Churms'  plans  turn 
out  successfully.  It  is  not  until  this  scene  that  he  receives  his 
whipping  at  the  hands  of  Fortunatus.  It  surprises  us,  therefore, 
to  read  in  scene  iv  the  following  dialogue : 

WiL  Lawer  wipe  cleane:    do  you   remember? 

Churms.     Remember,  why? 
WiL  Why  since  you  know  when. 

Churms.    Since  when? 

Wil.  Wfliy  since  you  were  bumbasted,  that  your  lubberly  legges  would 

not  carrie  your  lobcocke  bodie; 

When  you  made  an  infusion  of  your  stinking  excrements, 

in    your    stalking    implements: 

O  you  were  plaguy  frayd,  and  fowly  raide.0 


"Lines  1532-38. 
41  Lines  441-445. 
"Lines  358-366.  Araid  is  used  in  this  sense  in  Jack  Juggler,  1.  293. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  223 

These  lines  can  hardly  be  taken  as  a  prophecy,  nor  can  they  well 
refer  to  a  (previous  beating,  for  there  is  indication  that  the  knavery 
of  Churms  had  never  before  been  discovered.  When  they  are 
forced  to  flee,  Robin  tells  Churms  that  they  will  "go  into  some 
place  where  wee  are  not  knowne,  and  there  set  up  the  art  of  knav- 
erie  with  a  second  edition."  43  The  references  to  the  whipping 
must  either  have  been  inserted  by  one  who  did  not  take  into  con- 
sideration just  at  what  point  Churms  had  received  his  beating  or 
have  been  transferred  from  the  latter  part  of  the  play  by  some 
reviser  who  did  not  notice  the  incongruity. 

Again,  either  Will  Cricket's  inviting  Robin  Goodfellow  to  his 
wedding  or  his  expressed  opinions  of  Robin  would  seem  to  be  a 
later  insertion.  The  only  time  in  the  play  at  which  Will  meets 
Robin  he  is  deathly  afraid  of  him,  and  exclaims : 

.  .  .  Sounds,  I  thinke  he  be  a  witch.  ...  lie  speak  him  faire,  and 
get  out  ons  oompanie:  for  I  am  afraid  on  him." 

Again  when  Mother  Midnight  and  Pegge  are  discussing  Robin, 
Will  adds: 

...  I  sweare  by  the  bloud  of  my  codpiece, 

An  I  were  «,  woman  I  would  lug  off  his  lave  eares, 

Or  run  him  to  death  with  a  spit:  and  for  his  face, 

I  thinke  tis  pittie  there  is  not  a  lawe  made, 

That  it  should  be  fellonie  to  name  it  in  any  other  places 

then  in  baudie  houses.4* 

Between  these  two  speeches,  however,  when  Will  is  telling  Ploddail 
and  Peter  what  guests  he  is  to  have  at  his  wedding,  he  speaks  of 
Robin  in  an  entirely  different  manner.  Speaking  of  the  honest 
Dutch  Cobbler  who  is  to  be  his  chief  guest,  Will  adds: 

For  hees  an  honest  fellow,  and  a  good  fellow: 
And  he  begins  to  carrie  the  verie  badge  of  good  fellowship 
vpon  his  nose;  that  I  do  not  doubt,  but  in  time  he  wil  prooue 
as  good  a  Copper  companion  as  Robin  Goodfellowe  himselfe. 

iAnd  then  there  wil  be  Robin  Goodfellow,  as  good  a  drunken 
rogue  as  Hues:  and  Tom  Shoemaker;  and  I  hope  you  wil  not 
deny  that  hees  an  honest  man,  .  .  . 
And  a  number  of  other  honest  rascals.  .  .  .** 


48 Lines  2241-2243.  "Lines  457  ff.  «  Lines  1929-1934. 

48  Lines  1648-1651,   1661-1663,  1665. 


224  Wily  Beguiled 

The  fear  which  Eobin  instilled  in  Pegge  is  clearly  shown  in  the 
opening  lines  of  scene  xv ;  and  in  view  of  the  embarrassment  Kobin's 
(presence  would  have  caused  all  concerned,  it  is  surprising  that 
Will  should  have  looked  forward  with  such  anticipation  toward 
having  him  as  a  chief  wedding  guest. 

The  style  of  Wily  Beguiled,  also,  presents  many  difficulties,  and 
there  are  numerous  passages  which  suggest  patchwork.  Much  of 
the  verse  is  as  smooth  as  that  of  any  of  Shakspere's  predecessors, 
but  interspersed  with  it  are  lines  of  poor  meter,  no  polish,  and 
an  entirely  different  tone.  Frequently  a  speech  contains  both 
prose  and  verse,  as  in  the  passage  following  line  520: 

Now  Sir,  He  fit  my  selfe  to  the  olde  crummy  Churls  hu- 
mors, and  make  them  belieue  He  perswade  Lelia  to  marry 
Peter  Ploddall,  and  so  get  free  accesse  to  the  wench  at  my 
pleasure : 

Now  oth  other  side  He  fall  in  with  the  Soholler,  and  him  He 
handle  cunningly  too; 

He  tell  him  that  Lelia  has  acquainted  me  with  hir  loue  to 
him: 

And  for  because  hir  Father  much  suspects  the  same, 
He  mewes  hir  vp  as  men  do  mew  their  hawkes, 
And  so  restraines  hir  from  hir  Sophos  sight. 
He  say,  because  she  doth  repose  more  trust, 
Of  secrecie  in  me,  then  in  another  man, 
In  courtesie  she  hath  requested  me, 
To  do  hir  kindest  greetings  to  hir  Loue.47 

Starting  as  iprose,  the  speech  ends  as  verse,  the  whole  tone  of  the 
speech  changing.  Though  the  verse  is  by  no  means  so  good  as 
most  of  the  verse  in  the  play,  it  is  evident  from  such  expressions 
as  "and  for  because"  and  "hir  Sophos  sight"  that  the  author 
was  striving  for  meter. 

The  speech  of  Sophos  following  line  283  clearly  shows,  I  think, 
two  hands.  As  Lelia  and  Nurse  exeunt,  Sophos  says: 

Farewell  my  loue,  faire  fortune  be  thy  guide. 

Now  Sophos,  now  bethinke  thy  selfe 

How  thou  maist  win  her  fathers  will  to  knit  this  happie  knot. 

Alas  thy  state  is  poore,  thy  friends  are  few, 

And  feare  forbids  to  tell  my  fates  to  friend: 

Well,  He  trie  my  Fortunes; 


47  Lines   519-533. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  225 

And  finde  out  some  conuenient  time, 
When  as  her  fathers  leysure  best  shal  serue 
To  eonferre  with  him  about  faire  Lelias  loue. 

In  the  last  four  lines,  beginning  with  "Well,  He  trie  by  For- 
tunes," the  reader  must  notice  a  complete  change.  There  is  a 
distinct  lowering  in  the  style.  These  lines  are  not  in  the  vein 
of  bombastic  pedantry  that  characterizes  the  speeches  of  Sophos 
throughout  the  play.  In  them  we  have,  I  think,  slightly  altered 
remnants  of  an  earlier  form  of  the  play. 

Other  passages  that  show  differences  in  style  and  tone  are  those 
following  lines  500,  968,  1005,  1763,  2000,  2021.  Perhaps  the 
best  stylistic  evidence  for  revision  is  to  be  seen  in  the  speech  of 
Eobin  Goodfellow  in  lines  1005  and  following : 

Why,  Master  Gripe  he  casts  beyond  the  moone, 
And  Churms  is  the  only  man,  he  puts  in  trust  with  his  daugh- 
ter, and  (He  warrant)   the  old  Churle  would  take  it  vpon  his 
valuation,  that  he  wil  perswade  her  to  marry  Peter  Ploddall: 
(But  He  make  a  foole  of  Peter  Ploddall, 
He  looke  him  ith  face  and  picke  his  purse, 
WhiF'St  Churms  cosen  him  of  his  wench, 
And  my  old  gandsir  Holdfast  of  his  daughter. 
And  if  he  can  do  so: 

He  teach  him  a  trick  to  cosen  him  of  his  gold  too. 
Now  for  Sophos,  let  him  weare  the  willow  garland, 
And  play  the  melancholic  Malecontent 
And  plucke  his  hat  downe  in  his  sullen  eyes, 
And  thinke  on  Lelia,  in  these  desert  groues: 
Tis  ynough  for  him  to  haue  her,  in  his  thoughts; 
Although  he  nere  imbrace  her  in  his  armes. 
But  now,  theres  a  fine  deuise  comes  in  my  head, 
To  scarre  the  Scholler: 

You  shall  see,  He  make  fine  sport  with  him. 
They  say,  that  euery  day  he  keepes  his  walke 
Amongst  these  woods  and  melancholy  shades, 
And  on  the  barke  of  euerie  senselesse  tree 
Ingraues  the  tenour  of  his  haples  hope. 
jNbw  when  hees  at  Venus  altar  at  his  Orisons; 
He  put  me  on  my  great  carnation  nose 
And  wrap  me  in  a  rowsing  Calueskin  suite, 
And  come  like  some  Hob  goblin  or  some  diuell, 
Ascended  from  the  griesly  pit  of  hell: 
And  like  a  Scarbabe  make  him  take  his  legges: 
He  play  the  diuel,  I  warrant  ye. 

It  is  immediately  obvious  that  the  five  lines  after  the  mention 


226  Wily  Beguiled 

of  Sophos  and  the  lines  describing  his  wanderings  in  the  woods 
do  not  harmonize  with  the  others.  Their  tone  is  distinctly  more 
exalted.  Though  a  few  of  the  other  lines  could  pass  for  blank 
verse,  the  majority  of  them  are  in  prose,  and  should  be  so  printed, 
as  in  the  first  part  of  the  speech.  Moreover,  these  lines  are  not 
necessary  for  the  sense.  The  plan  is  set  forth  just  as  clearly  if 
they  be  omitted.  We  have  here,  I  believe,  an  instance  of  a  redac- 
tor's leaving  or  only  slightly  reworking  the  lines  of  the  original 
speech,  in  order  to  keep  the  original  sense,  but  inserting  a  few  lines 
of  his  own  to  improve  or  heighten  the  effect. 

It  is  also  possible,  I  think,  to  point  out  at  least  two  other  instan- 
ces of  insertion.  The  first  and  less  evident  is  in  scene  xii,  where 
Sylvanus  appears  with  his  band  of  "  Nymphs  and  Satyres  sing- 
ing." "We  are  unprepared  and  not  a  little  surprised  at  the  entrance 
of  Sylvanus  into  this  apparently  homely  and  unsophisticated  domes- 
tic drama.  The  value  of  such  an  objection,  perhaps  worth  little 
in  itself,  is  enhanced  by  the  evident  contradiction  in  Sophos' 
speeches  just  after  the  Nymphs  and  Satyrs  exeunt.  As  soon  as 
the  music  ceases,  Sophos,  rising  from  the  slumber  he  has  enjoyed 
during  the  presence  of  the  woodsprites,  joyfully  exclaims: 

What  do  I  heare?  what  harmony  is  this? 
With  siluer  sound  that  glutteth  Sophos  eares? 
And  driues  sad  passions  from  his  heauy  heart, 
Presaging   some   good   future   hap   shall   fall, 
After  these  blustring  blasts  of  discontent.48 

But  if  we  may  judge  from  the  speeches  immediately  following, 
these  sad  passions,  far  from  being  driven  from  his  heart,  have 
only  increased  to  make  his  heart  more  heavy.  After  greeting 
Fortunatus,  Sophos  laments: 

My  mind  sweet  friend  is  like  a  mastlesse  ship, 
Thats  huld  and  tost  vpon  the  surging  seas, 
By  Boreas  bitter  blasts  and  Eoles  whistling  winds, 
On  Rockes  and  sands,  farre  from  the  wished  port 
Whereon  my  silly  ship  desires  to  land; 
Faire  Lelias  loue  that  is  the  wished  hauen, 
Wherein  my  wandring  mind  would  take  repose, 
For  want  of  which  my  restlesse  thoughts  are  tost: 
For  want  of  which,  all  Sophos  ioyes  are  lost.* 


«  Lines  1335-1339.  *•  Lines  1364-1372. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  227 

This  contradiction,  though  slight  and  unimportant  in  itself, 
assumes  some  importance  in  view  of  the  imitation  in  the  second 
speech  from  The  Spanish  Tragedy  50  and  of  the  incompatibility 
of  the  dance  and  song  of  the  Nymphs  and  Satyrs  with  the  whole 
atmosphere  of  the  play.  Similarly  the  argument  that  the  song 
and  dance  here,  with  the  speeches  immediately  preceding  and 
following,  represent  an  insertion  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that 
there  is  stronger  evidence  that  the  other  song  in  the  play  is  an 
insertion.  This  second  passage  is  found  in  scene  xvi.  After 
putting  Churms  to  flight  and  after  uniting  Sophos  and  Lelia, 
Fortunatus,  when  setting  out  to  find  his  father,  thus  takes  his 
leave  of  the  lovers : 

Deare  friend  adieu,  faire  sister  too  farewel, 
Betake  y  our  selues  vnto  some  secret  place: 
Vntil  you  heare  from  me  how  things  fall  out. 

Exit  Fortunatus. 

Sophos*    We  both  do  wish  a  fortunate  goodnight: 
Lelia.     And  pray  the  Gods  to  guide  thy  steps  aright. 
Sophos.    (Now  come  faire  Lelia,  lets  betake  our  selues 
Vnto  a  little  Hermitage  hereby: 
And  there  to  liue  obscured  from  the  world 
Till  fates  and  Fortune  call  vs  thence  away, 
To  see  the  sunshine  of  our  Nuptiall  day. 
See  how  the  twinkling  Starres  do  hide  their  borrowed  shine 
As  halfe  asham'd  their  luster  so  is  stain'd, 
By  Lelias  beautious  eyes  that  shine  more  bright, 
Then  twinkling  Starres  do  in  a  winters  night: 
In  such  a  night  did  Ports  win  his  loue. 
Lelia.     In  such  a  night,  Mneas  prou'd  vnkind. 
Sophos.     In  such  a  night  did  Troilus  court  his  deare. 
Lelia.     In  such  a  night,  faire  Phyllis  was  betraid. 
Sophos.     lie  proue  as  true  as  euer  Troylus  was. 
Lelia.    And  I  as  constant  as  Penelope. 
Sophos.    Then  let  vs  solace,  and  in  loues  delight, 
And  sweet  imbracings  spend  the  liue-long  night. 
And  whilst  loue  mounts  her  on  her  wanton  wings, 
i  Let  Descant  run  on  Musicks  siluer  strings.      Exeunt. 

Then  follows  "A  SONGE"  of  three  stanzas. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  call  attention  to  the  borrowing  from 
The  Merchant  of  Venice 51  or  to  the  unnatural  delay  of  the  lovers 

80  Span.  Trag.,  n,  ii,  7ff. 

81  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  v,  i. 


228  Wily  Beguiled 

after  their  seeming  start.  But  who  sings  this  song?  Does  Sylva- 
nus  again  appear  with  his  chorus  of  Nymphs  and  Satyrs?  Or  do 
Sophos  and  Lelia  still  further  delay  their  departure  ?  More  likely 
it  is  sung  off  stage,  as  its  purpose  is  to  relate  the  passing  of  the 
night  and  the  dawn  of  a  new  day.  Though  the  action  of  the  play 
extends  over  more  than  a  fortnight,52  at  no  other  point  did  our 
author  think  it  necessary  to  advise  us  of  the  lapse  of  time.  Again 
it  was  not  the  custom  of  the  author  to  end  his  scenes  with  rime 
tags.  No  other  scene  has  the  double  couplet  as  here;  indeed  only 
one  scene,  scene  ii,  ends  in  a  rime  at  all,  and  there  the  meter  is 
so  faulty  that  it  contrasts  sharply  with  the  four  lines  with  which 
this  scene  ends.53  Further,  it  would  seem  that  the  song  inter- 
venes between  the  wrong  scenes.  As  I  have  said,  the  (purpose  of 
the  song  is  to  announce  the  passing  of  the  night  and  the  beginning 
of  the  new  day.  But  it  would  seem  that  night  follows  not  after 
this  scene,  but  after  the  next.  Churms  and  Robin,  who  realized 
that  "all  our  shifting  knauerie's  knowne"  and  who  were  "afraid 
of  euerie  officer,  for  whipping," 54  would  hardly  wait  until  the 
next  day  to  make  their  escape. 

In  view,  then,  of  the  long  delay  of  Sophos  and  Lelia  in  leaving 
the  stage,  of  the  borrowings  from  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  of  the 
problem  as  to  who  shall  sing  the  song,  of  the  rimes  closing  the  scene, 
and  of  the  failure  to  observe  when  one  day  ended  and  another 
began,  we  would,  I  think,  be  justified  in  identifying  this  passage 
as  the  work  of  a  late  redactor  who,  having  inserted  among  other 
lines  the  lines  borrowed  from  The  Merchant  of  Venice,  realized 
ihat  he  had  emphasized  its  being  night,  and  so  inserted  also,  with- 
out remembering  the  content  of  the  following  scene,  the  song  to 
advise  us  that 

Aurora    smiles   with  merry   cheere, 

To  welcome  in  a  happy  day. 

The  argument  that  Wily  Beguiled  had  existed  in  an  earlier 
form  is  greatly  strengthened  by  the  spasmodic  appearance  of 

"See  lines  1391-1392  and  1415-1416. 
58  The  lines  closing  scene  ii  are: 

All  this  makes  for  my  auaile, 

lie  ha  the  wench  my  selfe,  or  else  my  wits  shall  faile. 

"  Lines  2231-2234. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  229 

country  or  southern  dialect.  There  are  six  and  only  six  cases 
of  dialect  in  the  play.  iMother  Midnight  uses  it  but  twice;  in 
lines  1166  and  2480  she  exclaims  "by  my  vay,"  though  in  the 
same  lines  she  says  "for,"  and  everywhere  else  in  the  play  pro- 
nounces /  as  /.  Old  Ploddall  in  lines  1556,  1562,  and  2206,  says 
"vortie  shillings,"  though  everywhere  else  in  his  many  speeches 
he  correctly  pronounces  the  /.  It  cannot  be  that  these  two  words 
were  thus  peculiarly  pronounced  by  the  author  or  printer,  for 
"forty"  occurs  equally  as  often  as  "vorty."  Neither  can  these 
occurrences  be  explained  by  lack  of  type,  for  in  one  place  in  which 
the  dialect  is  used  it  is  clearly  meant  to  be  humorous.  Ploddall, 
meeting  with  Eobin  who  has  just  been  beaten  by  Fortunatus,  says 
to  him  relative  to  the  money  he  has  promised  him  for  "fraying 
the  Scholler  " :  "I  sent  you  vorty  shillings,  and  you  shal  have  the 
cheese  I  promised  you  too."  Eobin  replies:  "A  plague  on  the 
vorty  shillings,  and  the  cheese  too."  5B  The  humor  of  dialect,  like 
the  humor  of  the  characterizing  phrase,  depends  entirely  upon 
repetition  or  constant  use.  It  is  inconceivable  that  any  dramatist 
should  seek  to  secure  humor  by  carefully  inserting  six  bits  of 
dialect  four  or  five  hundred  lines  apart.  The  appearance  of  this 
dialect  can  only  be  explained,  I  think,  by  our  assuming  that  we 
have  an  older  play  containing  dialect,  which  was  revised  by  one 
who  for  some  reason  wished  to  eliminate  the  dialect.  Six  bits 
escaped  his  attention. 

I  have  called  attention  to  the  broad  and  early  type  of  humor 
in  the  comic  scenes,  the  evident  contradictions,  the  apparent  patch- 
work of  the  style,  three  seeming  insertions,  and  the  unexplainable 
use  of  dialect.  If  upon  these  grounds  we  may  assume  the  exist- 
ence of  an  earlier  form  of  the  play,  what  must  have  been  the  nature 
of  the  revision?  Most  of  the  scenes  in  which  Sophos,  Lelia,  and 
Fortunatus  speak  are  written  in  blank  verse  with  a  fluency  not 
found  in  comedies  before  the  nineties.  If  Wily  Beguiled  is  a 
revision  of  an  earlier  play,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  play  was 
most  thoroughly  reworked.  It  is  not  incredible,  however,  that 
a  reviser  may  have  followed  strictly  the  promise  of  Wilmot,  who 
in  1591  declared  that  Tancred  and  Gismund  was  "  Newly  reuiued 
and  polished  according  to  the  decorum  of  these  daies."  56  Such 

65  Lanes  2206-2209. 

K  Title-page,  edition  of  1591 ;  facsimile  in  Malone  Society  Reprint,  1914. 


230  Wily  Beguiled 

was  the  case,  I  believe,  with  Wily  Beguiled.  The  earlier  play 
must  have  been  written  in  doggerel,  or  possibly  in  both  prose  and 
doggerel ;  and  the  reviser,  while  keeping  in  the  main  the  substance 
of  the  play  and  the  content  of  the  various  speeches,  must  have 
worked  over  the  play,  eliminating  the  greater  part  of  the  rime, 
turning  most  of  the  speeches  of  the  nobler  characters  into  blank 
verse,  and  inserting  other  material  wherever  he  deemed  it  ex- 
pedient. His  reworking,  however,  was  not  perfect.  He  failed  to 
observe  several  evident  contradictions;  and  frequently  the  smooth- 
ness of  the  lines  inserted  contrasts  sharply  with  the  crudity  of 
the  original  lines  which,  for  connection  or  sense,  he  retained  or 
only  slightly  modified. 

If  Wily  Beguiled  as  we  have  it  is  a  revised  play,  one  cannot  of 
course  say  that  it  was  influenced  so  directly  by  The  Spanish  Tra- 
gedy, The  Merchant  of  Venice,  and  Romeo  and  Juliet  that  it  cannot 
be  connected  with  the  Merton  College  play  of  1567.  On  the  con- 
trary there  are  numerous  features  which  suggest  that  Wily  Beguiled 
is  related  to  Wylie  Beguylie.  In  the  first  place,  as  has  frequently 
been  pointed  out,  Wily  Beguiled  seems  to  have  been  a  school  play. 
The  scholar  Sophos  is  just  the  type  of  hero  that  would  please  a 
University  audience.  Speeches  such  as  that  of  Will  Cricket  in 
line  397  and  following,  likewise  suggest  that  the  play  was  intended 
for  a  University  audience.  Speaking  of  Lelia  and  Sophos,  Will 
says: 

Nay,  I  dare  take  it  on  my  death  she  loues  him, 
For  hees  a  scholler:  and  ware  schollers,  they  haue  tricks  for 
loue  yfaith,  for  with  a  little  Logicke  &  pitome  colloquium 
theile  make  a  wench  do  any  thing. 

The  moral  of  the  play  is  that  learning  is  much  to  be  preferred 
to  riches.  Gripe,  gaping  after  gold,  prefers  the  rich  fool  to  the 
poor  scholar.  But  not  so  with  the  heroine. 

But  Lelia  scorn's  proud  Mammon's  golden  mines, 
And  better  likes  of  learnings  sacred  lore, 
Then  of  fond  Fortunes  glistering  mockeries.67 

In  the  end,  however,  Gripe  repents: 

Hir  choyce  was  virtuous,  but  my  wil  was  base, 
I  sought  to  grace  hir  from  the  Indian  Mines, 


"Lines  263-265. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  231 

But  she  sought  honour  from  the  starrie  Mount: 
What  franticke  fit  possest  my  foolish  braine? 
What   furious   fancie  fired   so  my  heart, 
To  hate  f aire  Virtue  and  to  scorne  desert  ? w 

Fortunatus  voices  the  moral  of  the  play  when  reprimanding  his 
father's  greed: 

Where  golden  gaine  doth  bleare  a  fathers  eyea, 

That  pretious  pearle  fetcht  from  Pernassus  mount, 

Is  counted  refuse,  worse  then  Bullen  brasse; 

Both  ioyes  and  hope  hang  of  a  silly  twine, 

That  still  is  subiect  vnto  flitting  time: 

That  tournes  ioy  into  griefe,  and  hope  to  sad  despaire, 

And  ends  his  dayes  in  wretched  worldly  care. 

Were  I  the  richest  Monarch  vnder  heauen, 

And  had  one  daughter  thrice  as  faire, 

As  was  the  Grecian  Menelaus  wife, 

Ere  I  would  match  hir  to  an  vntaught  swaine, 

Though  one  whose  wealth  exceeded  Croesus  store, 

Hir  selfe  should  choose,  and  I  applaud  hir  choise, 

Of  one  more  poore  then  euer  Sophos  was, 

Were  his  deserts  but  equall  vnto  his. 

As  she  in  Natures  graces  doth  excell: 
iSo  doth  Minerua  grace  him  full  as  well.58 

It  has  also  been  noted  that,  as  in  all  school  plays,  the  Epilogue 
closes  with  a  request  for  a  plaudite. 

Further,  it  would  seem  that  both  plays  are  to  be  connected  with 
the  Christmas  holidays.  Wylie  Beguylie  we  know  was  performed 
during  the  Christmas  season ; 60  and  Wily  Beguiled  possesses  many 
characteristics  which  would  lead  us  to  connect  it  with  Christmas. 
Eobin  Goodfellow's  plan  to  frighten  Sophos  by  putting  on  his 
"  great  carnation  nose "  suggests  the  "  feynyd  berdis,  peyntid 
visers,  diffourmyd  or  colourid  visages,"  against  the  use  of  which 
at  Christmas  laws  were  passed  so  frequently.61  Among  the  oldest 

"Lines  2373-2378. 

58  Lines  2336-2350,  2353-2354. 

*°Merton  College  M\S.  Register,  Jan.  3,  1566/7;  quoted  by  Boas,  Uni- 
versity Drama,  p.  157. 

41  See  Riley,  Memorials  of  London,  pp.  193,  534,  561,  669;  and  Basker- 
vill,  "  Dramatic  Aspects  of  Medieval  Folk  Festivals  in  England,"  Studies 
in  Philology  (University  of  North  Carolina),  xvrr,  34. 


232  Wily  Beguiled 

of  the  Christmas  sports  was!  the  beast  dance,  in  which  the  per- 
formers dressed  themselves  in  the  skins  of  animals.62  Very  early, 
too,  do  we  find  references  to  characters  impersonating  fiends  in 
the  Christmas  plays ; 63  and  in  the  Christmas  games  Robin  Good- 
fellow  was  frequently  a  very  prominent  figure.64  In  Wily  Beguiled 
Robin  not  only  masquerades  as  a  devil  by  dressing  in  a  calf's 
skin,  but  even  speaks  of  his  costume  as  his  "  Christmas  Calue  skin 
sute."65  Churms,  too,  assumes  the  role  of  a  Christmas  figure 
when  he  is  spoken  of  by  the  Nurse  as  "  the  knaue  of  clubs.5' 6* 
From  passages  in  Rowlands'  Knave  of  Clubs  and  in  Like  Witt 
to  Like  we  learn  that  it  was  the  custom  to  dub  the  arch-knave 
the  Knave  of  Clubs,  and  the  latter  passage  indicates  that  this 
dubbing  was  connected  with  the  Christmas  sports.  Newfangle, 
,in  deciding  whether  Tom  Tosspot  or  Ralph  Roister  is  the  verier 
knave,  says : 

And  I   (Master  Judge)   will  so  bring  to  pass, 

That  I  will  judge  who  shall  be  knave  of  clubs  at  Christmas.'7 


••Chambers,  Mediaeval  Stage,  i,  166,  258,  391,  etc. 

**Acc.  Ld.  High  Treas.  Soot.,  vol.  n,  350  (1502)  :  "Item,  be  the  kingis 
command,  to  Sainct  Nicholas  beschop,  iij  Franch  crounis  .  .  .  Item,  to  the 
deblatis  and  ruffyis  vij."  Ibid.,  rv,  87  (1507)  :  "To  Sanct  Nicholais  .  .  . 
xxviijs.  To  his  ruffyis,  ixs."  Quoted  in  New  English  Dictionary  under 
Ruffy.  Robin  Goodfellow  derived  many  of  his  characteristics  from  the 
devil — ias,  for  instance,  his  Ho,  Ho,  Ho — and  no  doubt  many  of  these 
borrowings  were  due  to  the  analogy  between  Robin  and  Ruffyn,  a  conven- 
tional name  for  the  devil  in  the  mysteries. 

wjonson  introduced  him  into  his  Twelfth  Night  masque  of  Love  Re- 
stored. In  Mercurius  Fumigosus,  or  the  Smoking  Nocturnall,  no.  32,  Jan. 
3-10,  1665  (reprinted  in  Hazlitt,  Fairy  Tales,  Legends,  and  Romances,  p. 
337)  is  a  passage  describing  Robin's  pranks  on  Twelfth  Night.  Robin  is 
the  leading  character  of  Tell-Trothes  New-Teares  Gift,  ed.  Furnivall,  New 
Shak.  8oc.  Publ.,  1876.  And  in  Heywood's  Hierarchic  of  Angells,  1635, 
p.  574,  we  learn  that 

Robin   Good-fellowes   some,  some  call  them  fairies. 
sln  solitarie  roomes  these  uprores  keepe, 
And  beat  at  dores  to  wake  men  from  their  sleepe; 
Seeming  to  force  locks,  be  they  ne're  so  strong, 
And  keeping  Christmasse  gambols  all  night  long. 

"Line  1257. 
"Line  1758. 
87  The  Knave  of  Clubbs,  Percy  Society  Publications,  rx,  iv,  lines  7-14. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  233 

Moreover,  there  is  a  Christmas  mummers'  play  from  Lincoln- 
shire, written  down  in  1824,  in  which  there  appear  several  speeches 
almost  identical  with  speeches  in  the  Induction  to  Wily  Beguiled?* 
The  Induction  could  hardly  have  been  based  upon  the  mummers' 
;play:  not  only  are  a  number  of  words  obviously  misunderstood 
in  the  latter  (a  fact  which  could  easily  be  explained  by  its  oral 

Like  Will  to  Like,  Hazlitt's  Dodsley,  m,  332.  The  knave  of  clubs  was 
probably  connected  with  the  Twelfth  Night  sport  of  choosing  the  King  and 
Queen.  Pepys  three  times  mentions  this  sport,  and  under  Twelfth  Night, 
1665-6,  narrates  how  the  party  turned  "  to  choose  King  and  Queene,  and  a 
good  oake  there  was,  but  no  marks  found;  but  I  privately  found  the  clove, 
the  mark  of  the  knave,  and  privately  put  it  into  Captain  Cocke's  piece, 
which  made  some  mirth,  because  of  his  lately  being  known  by  his  buying 
of  clove  and  mace  in  the  East  India  prizes." 

88  Brit.  Mus.  Add.  MS.  33418.  The  following  are  the  speeches  resembling 
the  Induction  of  Wily: 

41  Fool,  a  pitiful  case  indeed  Madam  Hey  Ho !  wher's  all  this/  paltry 
poor ;  still  paltry  in  this  place,  and  yet  not  perfect  for/  shame,  step  forth 
people's  eyes  look's  dim  with  a  very  red/  expectation. 

1st  Ribboner.  How  now  m'e  Amorous*  George  still  as  live  and  as/ 
blyth  and  as  mad  and  as  melancholy  as  that  Mantletree./  What  play 
have  you  got  here  today 

iFool     Play  boy 

Rib  Yes  play/  I  look  upon  the  Tittle  of  the  spectimony  once  a  year 
you  old/  scallibush  nothing  but  parch  penny,  worth  tufcoal/  oallyely  old 
callymuf's  you  moiling,  boiling  bangling/  fool  stand  out  of  my  sight. 

Fool     Zounds  what  a  man/  have  I  got  here 

iRib  man  you  mistake  in  me  I'm  no  talker/  I  am  a  Juggler  I  can  shew 
you  the  trick  of  the  twelves  as/  many  trickes  as  there  are  days  in  the  year 
toils  and  moils/  and  motes  in  the  Sun.  I  have  them  all  upon  my  Finger 
end/  Jack  in  the  loft  quick  and  be  gone. 

Fool.    How  man  I'l  warrant  the 

Ribr    Hey  now  man  I   see  thou  can  do  something,    hold  thy  hand,/ 
here's  a  shilling  for  thy  labour;  take  that  to  the  poltry  of/  the  poor  and 
throw  unto  them,  say  thou  hast  quite'^lost  the/  title  of  this  play,  cally- 
flaskin  jest  shall  stenge  our  sight/  and  you  shall  hear  a  new  delight." 
The  opening  lines  show  that  it  is  a  Christmas  play: 

Gentlemen    and  Ladies 

I'm  come  to  see  you  all/ 
This  merry  time  of  Christmas, 

I  neither  knock  nor  call;  .  ./ 

For  a  copy  of  this  mummers'  play  and  for  innumerable  other  suggestions 
I  am  indebted  to  Professor  C.  R.  Baskervill  of  the  University  of  Chicago. 


234  Wily  Beguiled 

transmission),  but  the  passage  in  question  has  no  connection  with 
the  mummers'  play  as  a  whole.  The  play  indeed  seems  to  be 
merely  a  combination  of  other  Christmas  plays,  as  several  other 
stanzas  are  practically  identical  with  stanzas  in  The  Revesby 
Sword  Play.69  The  meter  of  the  play,  too,  indicates  that  the  lines 
common  to  the  play  and  the  Induction  were  later  additions,  they 
being  the  only  lines  in  the  play  which  are  not  in  rime.  Either  the 
Induction  was  used  by  the  author  of  the  mummers'  play  or  there 
was  an  older  Christmas  play  from  which  both  the  Induction  and 
the  mummers'  play  borrowed.  Whichever  may  have  been  the 
case,  we  have  added  reason  for  connecting  Wily  Beguiled  with 
the  Christmas  season. 

Again,  about  the  time  that  Wily  Beguiled  was  being  prepared 
for  the  stage,  there  is  a  probability  that  other  Oxford  plays  were 
being  reworked.  We  have  records  of  only  three  other  plays  as 
performed  at  Oxford  about  the  time  that  Wylie  Beguylie  was 
performed.  The  first  and  second  parts  of  Palaemon  and  Arcyte 
were  performed  on  September  2  and  4,  1566;  Wylie  Beguylie  was 
performed  during  the  Christmas  season  of  1566-7 ;  and  Damon  and 
Pithias  followed  just  a  year  later.  In  Henslowe's  Diary  are 
recorded  a  lost  play  Palaemon  and  Arcyte,  1594,  and  a  lost  play 
by  Chettle,  Damon  and  Pithias,  1600.70  As  Wily  Beguiled  was 

••In  the  opening  speech  the  fool  says: 

My  name  is  noble  Anthony 

I'm  as  live  and  as/  blyth  and  as  mad 

and  as  melancholy  as  that  mantletree/ 

make  room  for  noble  Anthony 
and  all  his  Jovial  Company. 

Compare  the  speech  of  the  fool  in  The  Revesby  Sword  Play,  Manly,  I,  305. 
Compare  the  speech  of  Pepper  Britches,  Manly,  I,  308,  with  the  following 
speech  of  the  Third  Eibboner: 

I  am  my  Fathers  eldest  Son 

and  heir  of  all  his  Lands/ 
<and  hope  in  a  short  time 

it  will  all  fall  in  my  hands. 

I  was/  brought  up  at  Linsecourt 

all  the  days  of  my  life, 
I'm/  walking  with  this  Lady   fair 

I  wish  she  was  my  wife.  .  ./ 
TOGreg,  i,  19  and  118. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  235 

probably  reworked  within  a  year  or  eighteen  months  after  the 
second  of  these  two  lost  plays,  the  suggestion  immediately  presents 
itself  that  the  dramatists  in  their  mad  rush  for  plots  seized  upon 
and  revised  these  three  early  Oxford  plays. 

This  suggestion  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  if  one  compares 
Wily  Beguiled  with  the  plays  which  we  have  of  the  time  of  Wylie 
Beguylie,  one  finds  that  those  characteristics  which  the  original 
of  Wily  Beguiled  must  have  possessed  are  to  be  found  in  plays 
contemporary  with  the  earlier  Wylie.  Most  likely  the  original 
was  in  doggerel,  the  reviser  carefully  eliminating  most  of  the  rime. 
Possibly,  however,  the  original  was  in  prose,  with  no  more  doggerel 
passages  than  appear  in  the  revision.  But  it  would  not  have 
been  surprising  even  had  Wylie  Beguylie  been  in  prose,  for  The 
Supposes,  performed  the  year  before,  is  in  prose.  As  I  have  said, 
the  original  must  have  contained  a  considerable  amount  of  dialect. 
That  dialect  was  popular  in  the  sixties  is  shown  in  Damon  and 
Pithias  by  Edwards'  introducing  the  figure  of  Grim  the  Collier 
with  his  country  dialect  into  the  court  of  Dionysius.  Wily  Be- 
guiled abounds  in  proverbs  and  familiar  phrases,  and  that  these 
were  popular  in  the  plays  of  the  sixties  is  attested  by  the  great 
number  of  such  phrases  that  Gascoigne  in  The  Supposes  and  the 
translator  of  Bug gb ears  insert  into  their  translations  with  no 
authority  whatever  from  the  original. 

Again,  Wylie  Beguylie,  to  have  been  the  original  of  Wily  Be- 
guiled, must  have  shown  considerable  Italian  influence,  for  Wily 
Beguiled  has  the  conventional  characters — the  pedant,  the  nurse, 
and  the  parasite — and  the  Italian  fondness  for  disguised  rogues. 
Tricks  played  upon  the  pedant  were  also  common  in  Italian 
comedy.  In  II  Marescalco,  for  instance,  a  boy  attaches  a  fire- 
cracker to  the  pedant's  coat-tails  and  sets  it  alight.  Compare 
with  this  trick  Robin  Goodfellow's  plan  to  frighten  the  scholar 
by  dressing  as  a  devil.  And  a  similar  disguise  is,  of  course,  found 
in  Bug  gb  ears. 

Mr.  Boas  states  that  "The  first  University  play  with  a  plot  of 
undoubted  Italian  origin  was  Hymenaeus,  acted  at  St.  John's, 
probably  in  March,  1578-9."  n  But  we  have  no  right  whatever 
to  assume  that  Hymenaeus  was  the  first  University  play  showing 

71  University  Drama  in  the  Tudor  Age,  p.  134. 


236  Wily  Beguiled 

Italian  influence,  for,  as  Mr.  Boas  says  later,  "At  Oxford,  as  at 
Cambridge,  the  records  of  the  University  stage  for  a  period  of 
nearly  fifteen  years  after  Elizabeth's  visit  are  very  meagre.  No 
extant  plays  can  be  assigned  to  this  time,  and  the  account  books 
of  Christ  Church  and  St.  John's  College,  which  would  doubtless 
have  furnished  some  details  of  theatrical  entertainments,  are 
unfortunately  missing  till  1577-8  and  1579-80  respectively." 72 
It  is  obvious  that  we  cannot,  with  such  incomplete  records,  assert 
there  were  no  Italian  plays  at  the  Universities.  On  the  contrary, 
in  view  of  the  great  vogue  of  Italian  literature  in  England  during 
these  years,  it  is  highly  probable  that  Italian  plays  were  performed 
at  the  Universities.  According  to  the  dating  of  Mr.  Bond,  its 
last  editor,  Buggbears,  based  primarily  upon  Grazzini's  La  Spirl- 
tata,  was  performed  in  1564  or  1565.  Mr.  Boas  does  not  discuss 
Bug gb  ears,  though  Herr  Grabau  had  thought  that  the  manuscript 
bore  traces  of  the  school  origin  of  the  play.  The  elaborateness  with 
which  the  music  is  copied  into  the  manuscript  does  suggest  that  it 
was  a  school  play.  But  whether  it  be  a  school  play  or  not,  it  bears 
witness  of  an  Italian  drama's  serving  as  the  source  of  an  English 
play  as  early  as  1565.  In  1566  The  Supposes,  which  had  been 
translated  from  Ariosto  by  George  Gascoigne,  was  performed  at 
Gray's  Inn.  In  the  same  year  appeared  the  first  part  of  Painter's 
Pallace  of  Pleasure;  in  the  next,  the  second  part  of  Painter 
and  Geoffrey  Fenton's  Tragicall  Discourses  from  Bandello  via 
Belleforest.  The  tremendous  popularity  of  these  Italian  stories 
is  shown  in  the  attack  by  Eoger  Ascham,  who,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, died  in  1568,  upon  "the  fond  books  of  late  translated  out 
of  Italian  into  English,  sold  in  every  shop  in  London,  commended 
by  honest  titles  the  sooner  to  corrupt  honest  manners  " ; 7S  and 
that  they  furnished  the  plots  for  many  plays  is  indicated  by 
Gosson's  denouncing  in  1579  the  Pallace  of  Pleasure  as  among  the 
works  which  "  have  beene  thoroughly  ransackt  to  furnish  the  playe- 
houses  in  London."  7*  Amidst  this  great  enthusiasm  for  Italian 
literature,  would  it  be  surprising  that  an  Oxford  play  of  1567 

•<*IUd.,  p.  157. 

18  Schoolmaster,  Little  Classics  edition,  81. 

**  Plays  Confuted  in  Five  Actions,  quoted  by  Brooke,  The  Tudor  Drama, 
p.  234. 


Baldwin  Maxwell  237 

should  adopt  several  of  the  conventional  characters  and  situations 
of  Italian  comedy? 

To  summarize — for  the  six  following  reasons  I  believe  that  Wily 
Beguiled  is  a  reworked  form  of  the  Merton  College  Wylie  Beguylie : 

1.    Wily  Beguiled  is  evidently  a  revised  play. 
,  2.     Its  content  indicates  that  it  was  undoubtedly  a  school  play. 

3.  Both  plays  seem  to  be  connected  with  the  Christmas  season. 

4.  The  humor  of  Wily  Beguiled  is  of  a  type  no  more  subtle 
than  that  of  plays  contemporary  with  Wylie  Beguylie. 

5.  There  is  indication  that  about  the  same  time  that   Wily 
Beguiled  must  have  been  reworked  other  Oxford  plays  were  being 
reworked. 

6.  Those  characteristics  which  the  original  of  Wily  Beguiled 
must  have  possessed  are  found  in  plays  contemporary  with  Wylie 
Beguylie. 

The  Rice  Institute. 


STAMPED  BELOW 


AN     INITIAL     FINE     OF     25     CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  5O  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


MAR    2    1933 


LD  21-50m-l,'3! 


Makers      V 
Syracuse,  N.  x. 
m.M  21,  1W8 


492900 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


